2.
Dear Thyagarajan Kalyanasundaram,
From your query I understand that the authority is seeking to demand CST on the interstate movement of equipment on the ground that equipment transferred to the other State/s has not been sold in the State to which they have been transferred. The understanding of the authority is totally wrong. Section 6A of the CST Act does not contemplate that the goods stock-transferred to one's own branch or to an agent shall be sold in the State to which they have been transferred. All that Section 6A of the CST Act requires a dealer to show is that the interstate movement of the goods was "occasioned by reason of transfer of such goods by him to any other place of his business or to his agent or principal, as the case may be, and not by reason of sale". In other words, if goods move from one State to another other than by way of sale, there will be no CST on such movement if declaration in Form "F" is furnished. Further, a look at declaration "F" also makes it clear that the declaration is merely to the effect that the goods transferred have been received and duly accounted for by the branch/agent who has received the goods. In fact there was Circular issued by Maharashtra VAT authorities that Form F is to be provided to dealers who undertake jobwork and send back the goods to the person who had sent the goods for job work. Therefore, the authority cannot demand CST on the ground that the goods sent to other State have not been sold in such other State.